The Bugle and the Penguins: Democracy and the Media in Argentina Robbie Macrory INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF THE AMERICAS UNIVERSITY OF LONDON The Bugle and the Penguins Democracy and the Media in Argentina Robbie Macrory MSc in Latin American Politics Supervisor: Professor Kevin Middlebrook September 2010 © Institute for the Study of the Americas, University of London Institute for the Study of the Americas 31 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9HA Telephone: 020 7862 8870 Fax: 020 7862 8886 Email: [email protected]/americas Web: www.sas.ac.uk/americas Acknowledgments I would like to thank Kevin Middlebrook and Par Engstrom at ISA for their support and useful advice; Ariel Duboscq and Jorge Brugnoli at la Universidad de Buenos Aires for going out of their way in helping me with my research; Klaus Gallo at la Universidad Torcuato Di Tella; and last but not least, Nicole and my parents. The Bugle and the Penguins: Democracy and the Media in Argentina CONTENTS Acknowledgments 3 Introduction 5 Chapter 1: The media and democracy 8 Freedom of expression and freedom of the press 8 Concentration of ownership and the threat to pluralism 9 Governments and the media: an unhealthy relationship? 11 Media reform in Venezuela: regulation or censorship? 13 Chapter 2: The media and the state in Argentina 16 PART ONE: Historical antecedents 16 From Peron to ‘El Proceso’ 16 The administrations of Alfonsín and Menem 18 PART TWO: Recent developments 20 Media regulation under Néstor Kirchner 20 El crisis de campo 21 Unresolved tensions: Grupo Clarín and the dictatorship 22 Conflict as a form of government? 24 Chapter 3: The Audiovisual Communications Law 26 From draft bill to sanctioned legislation 27 De-concentrating the Argentine media market 29 Regulatory bodies 31 Public service broadcasting 33 The Bugle and the Penguins: Democracy and the media in Argentina CONTENTS Conclusions 37 Current concerns and long-term benefits 37 The regional context: Hitler in the pampas? 38 An unfinished debate 39 References 48 Introduction IN THE EARLY HOURS of 10 October 2009, after several hours of long and impassioned debate, Argentina’s Senate passed a new law which, on paper, is the biggest reform of the country’s regulatory framework for broadcasting in almost 30 years. When proposals to pass such a law were originally made public seven months earlier, at the opening of the new Parliamentary session, President Cristina Fernández Kirchner described media reform as a ‘historical debt to Argentine democracy’ (Página 12 2009a). The law, the Ley de Servicios de Comunicación Audiovisual 26.522 (the LSCA), states that its objective is to democratise the media landscape by de-concentrating media ownership (LSCA 2009: Art. 1), in order to ‘universalise’ access to information and communication technology. The LSCA also aims to divide the radio-spectrum into three parts: a third will be reserved for private media companies, a third for the state, and a third for non-profit organisations such as community groups, universities, and charities. In one key article, media corporations will have one year to comply with new limitations on the number and type of different media outlets that the new legislation permits them to possess (ibid.: Art.161). The new law also creates Radio y Televisión Argentina Sociedad del Estado (RTA SE), a new body that aims in theory to develop public service media to represent the plurality of voices and opinions in Argentine society. Although Argentina, as with much of Latin America, has a history of state-funded media that promotes the government of the day, public media based on the principles of political plurality is a significant development. As such optimists see RTA SE as an important step for improving the range and quality of broadcasting in the country. Yet far from making the media more democratic, opponents of the law argue it is an attempt by the government to undermine critical voices and weaken freedom of expression in Argentina by increasing state control over the media. One of Latin America’s largest media conglomerates, Grupo Clarín, will be forced to sell off many The Bugle and the Penguins: Democracy and the media in Argentina of its assets in order to comply with the legislation, and views LSCA in very different terms to the official line. The headline in its flagship publication Clarín (‘The Bugle’) the day after the law was passed is unequivocal in its opinion: ‘Now the Kirchners have the law to control the media’ (Clarín 2009j). In a recent comparative study, the mass media has been described as ‘the connective tissue of democracy’ (Gunther and Mughan 2000: 1). Accordingly, this dissertation seeks to pick a path between the competing claims and discover whether or not the ley de medios will enhance democracy in Argentina, or damage it. To do so, it will analyse the content of the legislation to highlight its strengths and weaknesses in this regard, but also the political context in which it was debated and sanctioned, including the legislative passage of the law. It will be supported by evidence from coverage of the LSCA in the print media, particularly the anti-Kirchner Clarín and left-wing Página 12 dailies, and from semi- structured interviews with academics, think tanks, government officials and journalists. In doing so it may also be possible to understand how media regulation became a key policy of the Fernández government, and explain why this attempt at reform has been successful when a number of previous attempts in recent decades failed. Yet in terms of media reform, Argentina is not an isolated case in Latin America. The significance of a trend has been noted by the foreign press, with the Guardian describing how ‘from Argentina to Venezuela, governments have identified the media as a political obstacle’ (Guardian 2010). In July 2010, Uruguay became the latest country on to the continent to open the debate on national media regulation, with the government of President José Mujica announcing that it was seeking to reform the current broadcasting legislation (Página 12 2010b). In Ecuador, a major political debate continues over its own media reform law, which like the Argentine legislation, claims to democratise the broadcasting landscape (Hervieu and Samson 2010; Committee to Protect Journalists 2009b). Yet reforms implemented in recent years in Venezuela by the government of Hugo Chávez have been the most controversial, and have been regularly criticised by international bodies. Comparisons have been made between these reforms and the The Bugle and the Penguins: Democracy and the media in Argentina Argentina’s legislation by those opposed to the ley de medios (e.g. Clarín 2009i), and accordingly this dissertation will assess the validity of these claims. The first chapter of this dissertation will develop an analytical framework by exploring some of the arguments surrounding the relationship between the media, the state and democracy, in particular the tension between government intervention and freedom of expression. Chapter 1 will also highlight where these challenges have particular resonance for Latin America, for example, how the role of the media as an independent watchdog is under threat by both commercial practices and state intervention. It will also analyse recent developments in this context in Venezuela. Chapter 2 narrows the geographical focus of the dissertation, and is divided into two parts. The first charts the shifting course of media regulation in Argentina over the last 40 years, up to and including the administration of Carlos Menem. This will place in an appropriate historical context the particular features in the interaction between the state and the media in the country, and help to explain the regulatory landscape in which LSCA was developed. The second analyses the deterioration in the relationship Cristina Fernández and her husband and predecessor, Néstor Kirchner (popularly known as ‘the penguins’ on account of being from southern Argentina) and Grupo Clarín by exploring the political battles which have led to an ‘undeclared war’ between the two adversaries (Interview 2010j), and seeks to provide an understanding of the political context of the regulatory reform. Chapter 3 concerns the LCSA itself, and by examining the key features of the law, it may be possible to show if the new legislation will create the new framework for a more democratic media in Argentina as its supporters hope to achieve, or whether the implications of this may lead to very different results. Using this analysis it will become clear if the legislation can or should be compared to developments in Venezuela. The Bugle and the Penguins: Democracy and the media in Argentina CHAPTER 1 The media and democracy THE DEBATE OVER the ley de medios in Argentina has been, and continues to be, intensely political, channelled through newspaper headlines, slogans and government announcements. The purpose of the following academic literature review is to make clear, through a balanced and objective approach, that important theoretical principles underpin the new legislation. This will help inform Chapter 3’s analysis of its democratic value. Freedom of expression and freedom of the press In liberal theories of democracy, a media that is independent from government interference is essential for two key reasons. Firstly, it ensures the flow and transmission of ideas to enable citizens to make free, informed political decisions (Street 2001: 252), while, secondly, it performs a vital watchdog function, keeping check on the power of the state in its role as the fourth estate (Lichtenberg 1990: 110). The liberal history of press liberty has been understood as ‘an epic, heroic fight of the individual against political power’ (Keane 1991: 37), promoting the belief that any form of government control of the media will impinge on freedom of expression and therefore be to the detriment of these democratic functions of the press.